If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
19 November 2025
Our reference: LEX 87723
Steven Roddis
(Right to Know)
Only by email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Steven
Decision on your Freedom of Information Request
I refer to your request, dated and received by Services Australia (the Agency) on
30 September 2025 for access under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act) to the
following documents:
"Copilot - MS Teams and transcription use cases"
Reference Number: 57785
I request that access be provided in electronic format.
Pursuant to section 29(5) of the FOI Act, I request a waiver of any applicable charges
on the grounds that providing access to this document is in the general public interest.
Services Australia collects very sensitive personal, financial, and health information for
a vast majority of Australians. The use of generative AI tools like Microsoft Copilot to
process or transcribe internal communications raises significant questions about data
security, privacy risks, and the potential for inadvertent disclosure of citizen information.
Disclosure of this PIA is essential for public understanding and scrutiny of the agency's
risk assessment processes. It allows the public to see how Services Australia is
identifying and mitigating the privacy risks associated with foreign AI technology and
the public's very sensitive personal information, thereby promoting accountability.
My decision
The Agency holds one document (totalling 57 pages) that relates to your request.
I have decided to
refuse access to one document (Document 1).
I have decided that a document you have requested is exempt in full under the FOI Act as the
document includes:
• material that is subject to legal professional privilege (section 42 exemption)
• commercially valuable information (section 47(1)(b) exemption), and
• deliberative matter (section 47C conditional exemption).
PAGE 1 OF 9
Please see the schedule at
Attachment A to this letter for a description of the document and
the reasons for my decision, including the relevant sections of the FOI Act.
You can ask for a review of our decision
If you disagree with any part of the decision, you can ask for a review. There are two ways you
can do this. You can ask for an internal review from within the Agency, or an external review
by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. See
Attachment B for more
information about how to request a review.
Further assistance
If you have any questions, please ema
il xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx Yours sincerely
Tracy
Authorised FOI Decision Maker
Freedom of Information Team
FOI and Reviews Branch | Legal Services Division
Services Australia
PAGE 2 OF 9
If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
REASONS FOR DECISION
What you requested
"Copilot - MS Teams and transcription use cases"
Reference Number: 57785
I request that access be provided in electronic format.
Pursuant to section 29(5) of the FOI Act, I request a waiver of any applicable charges on
the grounds that providing access to this document is in the general public interest.
Services Australia collects very sensitive personal, financial, and health information for
a vast majority of Australians. The use of generative AI tools like Microsoft Copilot to
process or transcribe internal communications raises significant questions about data
security, privacy risks, and the potential for inadvertent disclosure of citizen information.
Disclosure of this PIA is essential for public understanding and scrutiny of the agency's
risk assessment processes. It allows the public to see how Services Australia is
identifying and mitigating the privacy risks associated with foreign AI technology and the
public's very sensitive personal information, thereby promoting accountability.
On 30 September 2025 the Agency acknowledged your request. You consented to exclude
personal details about our staff (such as their names) therefore, staff details have been
redacted in accordance with section 22(1) of the FOI Act.
We wrote to you on 20 October 2025 to advise we needed additional time to process your
request and asked for a 20-day extension of time. You provided your agreement by return
email on 21 October 2025, making the new due date 19 November 2025. The Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner was advised of the extension.
What I took into account
In reaching my decision I took into account:
• your original request dated 30 September 2025
• other discussions and correspondence with you
• the document which falls within the scope of your request
• whether the release of material is in the public interest
• consultations with Agency officers about:
o the nature of the document
o the Agency's operating environment and functions
• guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of
the FOI Act (the Guidelines), and
• the FOI Act.
Reasons for my decision
I am authorised to make decisions under section 23(1) of the FOI Act.
PAGE 4 OF 9
I have decided that the document you requested is exempt in full under the FOI Act. My findings
of fact and reasons for deciding the exemptions apply to the document are discussed below.
Section 42 of the FOI Act – Legal Professional Privilege
I have applied the exemption in section 42 of the FOI Act to Document 1 in full.
This section of the Act allows the Agency to exempt a document from disclosure if it is subject
to legal professional privilege (LPP).
Section 42 of the FOI Act provides:
1. A document is an exempt document if it is of such a nature that it would be privileged
from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.
2. A document is not an exempt document because of subsection (1) if the person entitled
to claim legal professional privilege in relation to the production of the document in legal
proceedings waives that claim.
3. A document is not an exempt document under subsection (1) by reason only that:
a) the document contains information that would (apart from this subsection) cause
the document to be exempt under subsection (1); and
b) the information is operational information of an Agency.
Paragraphs 5.129 of the Guidelines provides the following guidance in relation to the
application of section 42:
At common law, determining whether a communication is privileged requires a
consideration of:
• whether there is a legal adviser-client relationship
• whether the communication was for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice,
or use in connection with actual or anticipated litigation
• whether the advice given is independent
• whether the advice given is confidential.
The document you have requested contains legal advice provided to the Agency in relation to
the Copilot – MS Teams and transcription use cases. I am satisfied the document is advice
provided by external legal advisers acting with the required level of independence from the
client and there is a clear legal adviser-client relationship.
I am satisfied that privilege in these communications has not been waived as the document
has not been distributed further than is reasonably necessary for internal purposes. I am also
satisfied that the substance of the legal advice contained within the document has not been
used in any way which is inconsistent with maintaining the confidentiality of the advice.
I am also satisfied that section 42(3) of the Act is not applicable as the document is not
operational information of the Agency. Under section 8A of the FOI Act, operational information
PAGE 5 OF 9
is information held by the Agency to perform or exercise its functions or powers in making
decisions or recommendations affecting members of the public. The document concerns
recommendations and advice regarding the use of Microsoft Copilot in MS teams which does
not relate to the functions and powers of the Agency.
Further, I am satisfied the Agency’s ability to obtain legal advice on issues would be
substantially prejudiced if the document was to be made publicly available through FOI
processes. In my view, real harm is likely to result from release of the document as doing so
would waive privilege and disclose the legal provider’s approach to the interpretation, analysis
and application of legislation in the context of assessing and advising on any relevant Agency
risks.
Consequently, the Agency’s ability to obtain comprehensive legal advice in the future would
be substantially prejudiced if external law firms become aware that the Agency is expressly
waiving privilege in documents by making its legal advice publicly available via FOI processes.
For the reasons set out above, I am satisfied Document 1 is exempt in full under section 42 of
the FOI Act.
Section 47(1)(b) of the FOI Act – Commercially Valuable Information
I have applied the exemption in section 47(1)(b) of the FOI Act to parts of Document 1.
This section of the Act allows the Agency to redact material from a document if its disclosure
would reveal trade secrets or destroy or diminish commercially valuable information.
Commercial value may relate, for example, to the profitability or viability of a continuing
business operation or commercial activity in which an agency or person is involved.
The document falling within scope of your request reveals the legal service provider’s
methodology and analysis approach which has been developed and refined over a number of
years, involving investment and significant time and effort, and which is informed by the legal
service provider’s knowledge and experience producing Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA)
and its privacy work for the Agency.
The FOI Act does not restrict the use or further dissemination of material released in response
to an FOI request. In this case, the information of the legal service provider’s PIA methodology
and approach:
• is not publicly available or widely known
• has an intrinsic commercial value which would be of significant interest to potential
competitors (including other law firms, consultants and consultancy firms offering
similar services), and
• if disclosed, would or could reasonably be expected to give potential competitors an
unfair advantage and undermine the legal service provider’s commercial position.
I am satisfied the commercial value of the legal service provider’s PIA methodology and
approach would be, or could reasonably be expected to be, destroyed or diminished if the
documents were disclosed.
PAGE 6 OF 9
For the reasons set out above, I am satisfied Document 1 is exempt in part under section
47(1)(b) of the FOI Act.
Section 47C of the FOI Act - Deliberative matter
I have applied the exemption in section 47C of the FOI Act to parts of Document 1.
Section 47C of the FOI Act provides a document is conditionally exempt if it would disclose
deliberative matter. Deliberative matter is an opinion, advice or recommendation, or a
consultation or deliberation that has taken place in the course of, or for the purposes of, the
deliberative processes of an agency. Material which is operational or purely factual information
is not deliberative matter. The deliberative exemption also does not apply to reports of scientific
or technical experts, reports of a body or organisation prescribed by the regulations, or a formal
statement of reasons.
I am satisfied the document comprises deliberative matter, being advice and
recommendations, which have been prepared by the Agency’s legal services provider in the
course of undertaking the PIA. The document identifies privacy and secrecy compliance risks
for the Agency and includes recommendations for managing or eliminating identified risks and
maximising opportunities for enhancing privacy protection. I am also satisfied the document is
not operational information or purely factual information and is otherwise not of a kind
specifically excluded by the FOI Act.
Accordingly, I find that the document is also conditionally exempt in part, under section 47C(1)
of the FOI Act.
I consider the disclosure of the material would generally promote the objects of the FOI Act,
which is in the public interest. However, I also consider disclosure could reasonably be
expected to prejudice the Agency’s ability to obtain comprehensive legal advice in the future
and would destroy or diminish the commercial value of the provider’s PIA methodology and
approach, ultimately impeding the full and frank disclosure between a lawyer and client to the
benefit of the effective administration of justice.
As such, I find the public interest factor in favour of disclosing the material is outweighed by
the public interest factors against disclosure.
Conclusion
In summary, I have decided Document 1, as set out in the Schedule, is conditionally exempt
under sections 47C and 47(1)(b) of the FOI Act in part, and exempt in full under section 42 of
the FOI Act. Furthermore, I have decided on balance it would be contrary to the public interest
to release this information. Accordingly, I have decided not to release the document to you.
PAGE 7 OF 9
If not delivered return to PO Box 7820 Canberra BC ACT 2610
Attachment B
INFORMATION ON RIGHTS OF REVIEW
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
Requesting a full explanation of a Freedom of Information (FOI) decision
Before you ask for a formal review of a FOI decision, you can contact us to discuss your
request. We will explain the decision to you. This allows you to correct any
misunderstandings.
Requesting a formal review of a FOI decision
If you consider the decision is incorrect, you have the right to apply for a review under
sections 54 and 54L of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
You can apply for:
1. an
internal review by an Internal Review Officer of Services Australia (the agency),
and/or
2. an
external review by the Australian Information Commissioner.
Note: There are no fees for these reviews.
Applying for an internal review by an Internal Review Officer
In an internal review, a different decision maker to the Agency delegate who made the
original decision will carry out the review. The Internal Review Officer will make a fresh
decision on your request and will consider all aspects of the original decision and identify any
relevant additional factors.
An application for an internal review must be:
• made in writing
• made within 30 days of receiving this letter
• sent to the address at the top of the first page of this letter, or by email to
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Note: You do not need to fill in a form. However, it is a good idea to set out any relevant
submissions you would like the Internal Review Officer to further consider, and your reasons
for disagreeing with the decision.
Applying for external review by the Australian Information Commissioner
If you disagree with the original or internal review decision, or if you have not received a
decision within 30 days of applying for an internal review, you will have 60 days to apply in
writing for a review by the Australian Information Commissioner.
Note: The Australian Information Commissioner generally prefers FOI applicants to seek an
internal review before applying for an external review.
PAGE 8 OF 9
You can lodge your application:
Online:
www.oaic.gov.au
Post:
Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Email:
xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
Important:
• If you are applying online, the application form the FOI Review Form is available at
Information Commissioner Review Application form
• If you have one, you should include with your application a copy of the Agency's
original and internal review decisions on your FOI request
• Include your contact details
• Set out your reasons for objecting to the Agency's decision.
Complaints to the Australian Information Commissioner and Commonwealth
Ombudsman
Australian Information Commissioner
You may complain to the Australian Information Commissioner concerning action taken by
an agency in the exercise of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act.
There is no fee for making a complaint. A complaint to the Australian Information
Commissioner must be made in writing. The Australian Information Commissioner's contact
details are:
Telephone: 1300 363 992
Website:
www.oaic.gov.au
Smart Form:
FOI Complaint Form
Commonwealth Ombudsman
You may also complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman concerning action taken by an
agency in the exercise of powers or the performance of functions under the FOI Act. There is
no fee for making a complaint. A complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman may be
made in person, by telephone or in writing. The Commonwealth Ombudsman's contact
details are:
Phone:
1300 362 072
Website:
www.ombudsman.gov.au
The Commonwealth Ombudsman generally prefers applicants to seek review before
complaining about a decision.
PAGE 9 OF 9
